On January 13, 2016, the Worcester Anti Foreclosure Team (WAFT) blockaded the foreclosure auction of two houses in Worcester Massachusetts.

The auctions were both held at 3 PM and the group had to divide its forces.

I went to the blockade of the auction on Lake Ave. Such blockades are suppositionally legal, as seen in the statue:

M.G. L. Chapter 244, Section 1
A mortgagee may, after breach of condition of a mortgage of land, recover possession of the land mortgaged by an open and peaceable entry thereon, if not opposed by the mortgagor or other person claiming it, or by action under this chapter; and possession so obtained, if continued peaceably for three years from the date of recording of the memorandum or certificate as provided in section two, shall forever foreclose the right of redemption.

The key phrase is “If not opposed.” The mortgagors with the support of WAFT opposed the auction.

The WAFT people were already in front of the house holding signs when I arrived. They had parked their cars in front of the house to make it a little more inconvenient for the bidders to reach the property.

The bidders parked across busy Lake Ave., which is where the bank lawyer also parked.

One of the WAFT volunteers tried to engage the lawyer by asking his name, but he refused to give it.

As a symbol of the blockade, the WAFT people, led by Chis Horton, held a long caution tape in front of the property and on the sidewalk. It seemed to work, as the bidders never crossed the tape.

The auction was held on the sidewalk, just north of the property.

Before the auction, one of the bidders asked us why should he not bid on the property. One young man tried to explain, but he eventually asked Chris to come over and talk with the gentleman. The conversation was polite, but the bidder went to the auction seemingly unconvinced by the WAFT arguments.

The mortgagor is Gerald who has suffered a debilitating injury preventing him from working. He is now disabled.

He has been trying to get mortgage modification with the banks for a number of years and hasn’t had any luck with them.

There is a claim of evidence of bank fraud.

Gerald had given up hope and had begun to pack his belongings to move.

After meeting with WAFT, he became hopeful and decided to fight the eviction.

As the auction began some of the WAFT blockaders began to chant anti foreclosure mantras. Soon the auction was over. None of the bids were acceptable to the bank. The bank bought the property back.

Gerald and his family will remain in the property, at least for a while.

Patricia, a member of WAFT, came late to Lake Ave., as she was at the other blockage on Lyman St. At one time she too was being foreclosed on and said that she wanted to help, as she was helped.

WAFT meets at the Pleasant Street Neighborhood Center on Pleasant Street, in Piedmont. The group is looking for more people to help with education and other actions.

“What once was my American Dream to own a home and start a life-long investment at the age of 22 turned into being years and years of devastating financial burden ruined credit and constant fear of failure loss and homelessness,” explains Kate Palmaccio of Lunenberg, mother of a toddler. Palmaccio is one of the many homeowners swept up in the massive increase in foreclosures in 2015. The Warren Group today released figures that the first 11 months of 2015 saw a 50 percent increase over that period in 2014.

Although industry analysts claim these foreclosures are an upswing because banks have figured out how to follow the laws, those on the ground are seeing no such indication.

“They are not successfully navigating the process. They are getting away with more; it is that the enforcement of the regulations has softened. HomeCorps is essentially over and they are not even attempting to follow HAMP guidelines,” explained Jon Marien, Foreclosure Inervention and Default HUD Counselor, at the Neighborworks Homeownership Center in Worcester.

“We are canvassing over 50 properties every other week and finding the bulk of them vacant as people are leaving and abandoning their properties when banks refuse to modify their loans further destroying our neighborhoods and community,” said Rose Webster-Smith, lead organizer for Springfield No One Leaves and a homeowner fighting herself to save her home “post-foreclosure.”

As homeowner activists and their allies having been continuing work to hold off the new Law that is designed to sweep illegalities of past foreclosures under the carpet if former homeowners do not act in a year to protect their rights, those working on this issue on the ground are concerned.

“The bad legislation has not even gone into effect, and its like they were waiting to make the attack and they see no re-enforcements,” explained Silas Sanderson, an outreach leader for the Worcester Anti-Foreclosure Team. Worcester County has seen the largest increase with an almost 100% increase year to date in petitions to foreclose, the first visible step in the foreclosure pipeline.

Meanwhile, experts in the field point to real solutions to the massive surge in those in the foreclosure pipeline which will stop the damage of foreclosures and actually save lenders money.

“As a lawyer who knows this area and a long-time professional neutral mediator, I know that those who have not seen the transformative power of face-to-face mediation may not appreciate it. But I am not surprised that Lynn’s short period of pre-foreclosure mediation resulted in 97% of participants receiving affordable loan modifications,” stated David L. Evans, Murphy & King, “Given the massive increases of those in the foreclosure pipeline and the fore-shortened right to cure period in Massachusetts, now is the time for a pre-foreclosure mediation program statewide.” An Act Facilitating Alternatives to Foreclosure is positioned to move this legislative session if legislators act soon.

As Jane Brady of Newton, Mass., explained what mediation could have done for her, “My flight has been a long, stressful and horrible ordeal. I was forced to declare bankruptcy to stop the 1st foreclosure attempt, which is now held against me in any court hearings to fight & reverse a wrongful foreclosure. The private investor who holds my loan refused to negotiate nor did they offer mediation to avoid a foreclosure. CitiMortgage allegedly sold my loan to a Private Hedge Fund Investor, while my HAMP Modification was in the underwriting process. This was my 4th HAMP Modification request. I finally was truly eligible & met all criteria for approval, but was denied because ‘my loan was sold and now paid’”

Advocates affiliated with MAAPL (Massachusetts Alliance Against Predatory Lending) and others are pleased to report that an important piece of legislation decreasing unfair burden on the 68,000 households foreclosed in this crisis has taken a step forward.

“In our case, our family has a court ruling that the foreclosure of our home in Worcester was illegal, yet the Massachusetts Department of Revenue (DOR) came after us for a “forbearance” that the bank reported so that the bank could take a tax write off, even on an illegal foreclosure!” explains Mildred Collins, a Worcester, MA homeowner sharing her terrifying story: “This was money we certainly never profited from and DOR levied my bank accounts, overdrawing them, and even threatened to take away me and my husband’s drivers licenses. I have had to spend hours and hours traveling to and from the DOR office in Springfield and am still waiting for resolution on this issue. “

The United States Congress and the IRS recognized the injustice of taxing people on money they never made in an overpriced mortgage that led to a foreclosure (whether it is ever found illegal or not); federal legislation making this type of decrease in debt not taxable passed half a dozen years ago. Foreclosed homeowners have not received a profit.

“An Act Relative to the Tax Relief of Mortgage Debt” has been favorably reported out from the Massachusetts Legislative Joint Committee of Revenue. This bill will protect all homeowners from being taxed for a “profit” they never received from losing their home to foreclosure whether it is ever found illegal or not).

“Many people don’t know that even when a homeowner wins a court battle against the bank that illegally foreclosed on them, they may still be taxed for the supposed “profit” they made from having their mortgage wiped out by foreclosure,” continues Mildred Collins, who is also a member of the Worcester Anti-Foreclosure Team. This bill will protect homeowners who have proven a foreclosure is illegal but continue to be victimized in other ways.

“Illegal foreclosures are among the most insidious injustices affecting our families and communities. Whether a family proves that a foreclosure was illegal, they are often still being taxed by the state.,” explained Dawn Duncan who has fought foreclosure herself and is a member of Lynn United.

Attorneys representing homeowners have seen this practice too. “We have seen many homeowners face incredible challenges to prove that they were exempt from phantom income due to forgiveness of debt. Most couldn’t afford a tax attorney and ended up with oppressive tax bills and loss of tax refunds. This bill would properly exempt this phantom income and remove this unfair burden,” says Todd Kaplan, Senior Attorney in the Consumer Rights Division of Greater Boston Legal Services.

House 2607 and Senate 1464, the same bill filed on both sides of the legislature, now moves forward and advocates are hopeful that an expedited vote will help provide relief as soon as possible to this additional and unfair destructive financial burden on the families of Massachusetts.

“We applaud the work of the Revenue Committee and look forward to the widely supported bills passing quickly into law,” said Grace Ross, Coordinator of the Mass Alliance Against Predatory Lending, “This past January, MAAPL filed nine (9) bills because Massachusetts residents and our entire economy deserve a full-fledged repair to the massive and pervasive damage caused by illegal subprime lending and the ongoing foreclosure crisis that has followed.”

Please RSVP to dlariviere@cmhaonline.org by January 19 so enough lunch can be ordered.

All are welcome!

Agenda Item:

Foreclosure and Tenant Rights:

Due to recent uptick of foreclosure petitions in Worcester County, we feel it is important to discuss the rights and responsibilities of tenants in foreclosure properties.

CMHA meetings are open to anyone wishing to learn more about housing and homelessness in our community and benefits available. It’s also a great opportunity for organizations to share information about themselves.

As you are aware, the issue of foreclosure mediation has been debated by the Worcester City Council for several months with plenty of discussion, but no action. Growing frustrated with the lack of action, I wrote to the most vocal council member on the topic as follows. I did not seek to attach myself to the issue for political advantage; rather, I handed out a solution and would have been satisfied if any action were taken to achieve a result. Clearly, if any action had been taken, I would not be writing. I will let the email chain speak for itself:

On Apr 2, 2013, at 9:16 PM, I wrote to an email from my phone titled “Foreclosure Mediation” to Councilor X:

Springfield Mass program seems to work… Looks like a settlement just made to implement the plan:

So, it appears we have a format to follow. Love the fine Springfield imposes against the banks for not attending.

The RI bankruptcy court also has a plan for mediation in Chapter 13 plans.

Michael

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone

Response from Councilor X:

Thanks.

Sent from my iPhone

Email sent to Councilor X on April 3, 2013

Councilor X:

I sent over some information to you last night relative to the foreclosure programs in other cities. Now that I am at a computer, I am able to forward more substantial information. I have attended a number of conferences on the issue relative to the U.S. Bankruptcy Court’s program in Chapter 13 Plans that started in RI, so I have a bit of background.

Attached you will find the Springfield and Providence Ordinances.

Springfield uses a neutral not-for-cost mediation program. There are several options available. First, you could simply try the Worcester Bar Association to administer a program of volunteers (POC = Polly Tatum, President #508-795-1557.) Second, the Better Business Bureau currently administers the Lemon Law Arbitration Program under Massachusetts Law, the arbitrators get a “gratuity” of $100.00 per case (POC Nancy Cahalen, President #508-755-3340 x109.) Third, the District Court uses a mediation program formally administered by the WCAC now being administered by Mediation Services of North Central Mass (I do not have any contacts other than what is listed on the website – POC Elaine Sherrin, Director #978-466-9595.) Finally, the Massachusetts Justice Project currently runs the Lawyer for the Day Program and through volunteers administers free legal services such as bankruptcy cases (I do handle free bankruptcy cases, but do not have a POC, the just send them over to me, the main number is #800-639-1209.)

I just don’t see where implementation of such a program would cost the city an inordinate amount of funds. Further, where we have language concerning ordinances in use, this matter shouldn’t continue to drag out in meeting after meeting. Finally, where the Federal District Court found the ordinance in Springfield to be constitutional and where the banks challenging it settled (and agreed to be bound) before the Appeals Court, passing such a measure is less likely to face a legal challenge or cost the city to defend it.

I am not trying to insert myself in this matter; rather, I been hearing the debate for several months and find it vexing that no progress has been made. This has been your issue; hence, I have communicated with you. If I can be of further assistance, let me know.

Thank you.

Michael Gaffney

On Apr 3, 2013, at 5:27 PM, I wrote:After review of the last paragraph of my last email, consulting with my wife and a friend, it appears I miscommunicated my thoughts. I meant to say that the situation was not being resolved, that you were leading the charge on the issue and I was sending you information to help you out directly as this has been near and dear to you.Unfortunately, the way in which I communicated was as if you weren’t getting things done. That is absolutely not what I intended. I tend to focus on resolving an issue and am less careful about how I communicate. Clearly I will need to improve my delivery. I had hoped to help and instead I may have inadvertently insulted you. It was not my intent.

I hope you will accept my sincere apology.

Michael

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone

Response from Councilor X, April 3, 2013:

No problem. I appreciated you sending the info.

Sent from my iPhone

Article sent to the Editor, Worcester Telegram and Gazette, May 1, 2013 (unpublished, but plenty of specious and inane comments were published on May 3, 2013)

Dear Sir/Madam:

Your recent article titled “Big Banks win again” concerning the $5,000.00 foreclosure bond ordinance showed the short falls in the current bond requirement. We need to fix the unintended consequences of the bond requirement and strengthen the ordinance to help our citizens in foreclosure.

The cities of Springfield and Providence have passed ordinances that require the mortgage holder to mediate with the homeowner prior to foreclosure. Springfield’s ordinance was upheld in Federal District Court and was settled on Appeal. All the tools we need to update our ordinance are available and can be easily implemented. We need to rewrite the current ordinance to protect our citizens. We can’t let another month pass and another family be put out on the street without taking action.

Michael T. Gaffney

Worcester

Today is May 5, 2013.

*******************************

A mortgage mediation program for Worcester

Written by admin on August 21st, 2013

By Michael Gaffney, candidate for Worcester City Councilor at Large

Mortgage mediation is a process whereby during the foreclosure process, a representative from the bank meets with the homeowner relative to a mortgage workout. Getting two parties to sit down in a neutral environment to discuss the issues often yields positive results. A property lost to foreclosure lowers surrounding property values and seriously disrupts neighborhoods.

On August 19, 2013, per the Telegram and Gazette, the administration of the City of Worcester reported that it would not back an ordinance to establish a mediation program on property entering into foreclosure.
The reasons given for not implementing such a program were costs, logistics and legality:

As to costs, there are far too many volunteer organization as well as services operating under a block grant that provide free services to our courts and other programs. There are also numerous low cost providers. Cost is simply not a viable argument.
Logistically, the City of Worcester already requires a $5,000.00 bond for potential costs upon the filing of a foreclosure; therefore, someone is already assigned to review the bond and a tracking mechanism is already in place. The time involved in a referral to a mediation program is nominal.

As to the alleged legal issue, in the August 19, 2013 edition of the Telegram and Gazette, the City Solicitor claims that the Springfield ordinance is pending appeal which is mostly accurate. On July 2, 2012, U.S. District Judge Michael Ponsor dismissed the lawsuit filed by the banks against Springfield’s mediation ordinance stating “the modest effort made by the city to soften the crisis through the promulgation of the two ordinances violates no Constitutional provision or state statute.” An appeal was filed by the banks. On or about March 14, 2013, the banks offered to drop the appeal if the City of Springfield would drop the bond requirement. The cause of the appeal was not with the mediation ordinance; rather, the cause of the appeal is the posting of the bond.

Here, the City of Worcester has implemented the bond requirement but not the mediation ordinance. Take note, the City of Springfield’s bond requirement is $10,000.00 which appears more penal than remedial. The banks were willing to allow the mediation ordinance. It seems obvious that the Springfield City Council is more concerned about the bond money than solving the problem for the homeowners, unlike the City of Worcester.

Our City Council rose to the occasion last night to advise the administration that they will push forward and should. In response, the administration offered to come to the table and look at all options. Unfortunately, this means further delay in the enactment of any ordinance, but the parties appear willing to further the process. Hopefully action will be taken sooner rather than later.

Mortgage mediation is a process whereby during the foreclosure process, a representative from the bank meets with the homeowner relative to a mortgage workout. Getting two parties to sit down in a neutral environment to discuss the issues often yields positive results. A property lost to foreclosure lowers surrounding property values and seriously disrupts neighborhoods.

On August 19, 2013, per the Telegram and Gazette, the administration of the City of Worcester reported that it would not back an ordinance to establish a mediation program on property entering into foreclosure.
The reasons given for not implementing such a program were costs, logistics and legality:

As to costs, there are far too many volunteer organization as well as services operating under a block grant that provide free services to our courts and other programs. There are also numerous low cost providers. Cost is simply not a viable argument.
Logistically, the City of Worcester already requires a $5,000.00 bond for potential costs upon the filing of a foreclosure; therefore, someone is already assigned to review the bond and a tracking mechanism is already in place. The time involved in a referral to a mediation program is nominal.

As to the alleged legal issue, in the August 19, 2013 edition of the Telegram and Gazette, the City Solicitor claims that the Springfield ordinance is pending appeal which is mostly accurate. On July 2, 2012, U.S. District Judge Michael Ponsor dismissed the lawsuit filed by the banks against Springfield’s mediation ordinance stating “the modest effort made by the city to soften the crisis through the promulgation of the two ordinances violates no Constitutional provision or state statute.” An appeal was filed by the banks. On or about March 14, 2013, the banks offered to drop the appeal if the City of Springfield would drop the bond requirement. The cause of the appeal was not with the mediation ordinance; rather, the cause of the appeal is the posting of the bond.

Here, the City of Worcester has implemented the bond requirement but not the mediation ordinance. Take note, the City of Springfield’s bond requirement is $10,000.00 which appears more penal than remedial. The banks were willing to allow the mediation ordinance. It seems obvious that the Springfield City Council is more concerned about the bond money than solving the problem for the homeowners, unlike the City of Worcester.

Our City Council rose to the occasion last night to advise the administration that they will push forward and should. In response, the administration offered to come to the table and look at all options. Unfortunately, this means further delay in the enactment of any ordinance, but the parties appear willing to further the process. Hopefully action will be taken sooner rather than later.

maaplinfo@yahoo.comwww.MAAPL.info The statewide Alliance working to reverse the foreclosure crisis in Massachusetts, expressed concern yesterday about an unexpected development in the handling of post-foreclosure evictions. “We are finally getting the word out to families that you do not have to leave at foreclosure. Our state protects your rights to a legal eviction,” explains Grace Ross, Coordinator of the Mass Alliance Against Predatory Lending. “We were dismayed then to hear from our local affiliates about the arrests without warning in Brockton. In general, police (like fire and other municipal workers) have experienced enough foreclosures in their ranks to be more respectful of housing rights they are only recently being dragged into address. We stand ready with training materials for police forces across the state. We trust this was just a single incident mistake that will be corrected today and that those facing foreclosure will feel safe to stay post-foreclosure knowing their legal rights will not be violated.”

Brockton Family Evicted and Arrested after Tense StandoffArraignment in Brockton District Court Brockton – Yesterday Tyrone Hubbard and his two sons were arraigned in Brockton District Court. They are facing charges of trespassing stemming from a Fannie Mae eviction on Friday September 28th, at their 137 Walnut Street home in Brockton. Approximately 40 people supporting the Hubbard family protested and formed an eviction blockade, leading to an intense standoff with police. Supporters included members from City Life/Vida Urbana (CLVU), Brockton Bank Tenants Association, the Coalition of Social Justice and Lynn United for Change. Brockton City Councilor Jass Steward, who was also at the location, made courageous efforts to amicably resolve the issue without eviction.

At approximately 11 am, Brockton police formed a line, marched through protesters, entered the home and immediately arrested Mr. Hubbard and his two sons. Two protesters sitting in the doorway – Sue Parsons and Annie Hunt, were pushed aside and not arrested. Rev. Stewart Lanier, who was also sitting in the doorway willing to risk arrest, was also arrested. Rev. Lanier, an extremely disciplined and mild-mannered man, has been charged with trespassing, and as reported by the Brockton Enterprise he is also charged with assault and battery on a police officer along with interfering with a police officer in the performance of his duty.

At no time was a warning given to any one to “leave the premises or be arrested.”

In addition to Mr. Hubbard, his two sons and Rev. Lanier, the police also took into custody a young mother and her 6-week old baby who are members of the Hubbard family. They were secretly taken out the back door, through a hole in the back fence and later to the hospital. Police alleged that there was carbon monoxide in the home. No appreciable amount was found in either the mom or the baby at the hospital. During protests, City Life always emphasizes that the fight is with the bank, not the police. The Brockton police have made their behavior an issue and in doing so, gave 3 different reasons for arresting the family:

· First, police said the family refused to leave when ordered; but they received no such order. The family was fully prepared to leave – they were scrambling to get medicine etc., when arrested. This is the first family EVER arrested in a City Life eviction blockade.

· Second, police maintained the family had been trespassing ever since 9 am, the time the constable said he was arriving. This is a suspect legal rationale. But even people who are trespassing are told to leave or face arrest.

· Third, supporters and City Life members were told the police decided to arrest the family because they were nervous about protesters and believed that the protesters would disperse once the family was arrested. City Life blockades are loud but extremely disciplined, and there is never a hint of violence. City Life never leaves members in jail without supporting them.

For the following reasons, Fannie Mae is completely responsible for everything that happened on Friday September 28th, as well as the arrest of Rev. Stewart Lanier and the entire Hubbard Family. Fannie Mae rejected 3 different alternatives to resolve this case without eviction:

· Fannie Mae refused to offer principal reduction to avoid foreclosure, even though their own studies show it’s cheaper to reduce principal than to foreclose and evict.

· Fannie Mae accepted the Hubbard’s rent for 11 months (through September) but refused to continue to take rent and allow them to stay. As a result of a CLVU protest against Fannie Mae in DC, one of Fannie Mae’s national attorneys called to agree that the Hubbard’s had paid rent through September, BUT they still planned to evict them!

· Fannie refused to wait for the outcome of the Hubbard’s application for a new mortgage from Boston Community Capital, a non-profit that Fannie Mae has previously worked with.

As the city of Brockton continues to be hit hard by foreclosures and bank evictions, the bank tenant movement will continue to grow. As a result, there will inevitably be more protests. So, the Brockton Bank Tenant Association, City Life or is supporters will not be intimidated or deterred from organizing or conducting eviction blockades in the city of Brockton.

InCity Times asks the voters of Worcester to
make their voices heard and get out
and vote September 20! These trying
times require bright, honest and com-mitted
commuity leaders For this pre-liminary
election, voters must narrow
the City Council at Large, District 1
and District 3 fields.

We are asking that you vote for:

District 1: Virginia W. Ryan

The readers of this column know
how pointless I believe incumbant
Joffrey Smith is – from his half heart-ed
attempt at serving his constituents
to his half-assed movie career as an
extra to his half-finished house in the
West Side. Yeah, it was once cool that
he was young and running for office
several election cycles ago, but now
Smith is not so young and has proved
himself to be just like every other
entrenched incumbent: doesn’t return
phone calls, doesn’t act on constitutent
requests, has no real ideas/passions
about anything and (as proven in last
election cycle) wanted to use his city
council seat as a catapault for new,
higher office Well, Smith ran for state
rep a few years ago and lost big time
He took a drubbing – finished way way
behind the two front runners. Which
means: Smith is most likely stuck in
his Worcester City Council District 1
seat and District 1 is stuck with this
totally lackluster character who thinks
because he is cute you should give him
your vote.

Don’t! He’s a cypher!

But at least he’s not a criminal the
way Tony J Economou is – the next
person running for District 1.

Economou, a real estate agent ILLEGALLY
tried to scare poor folks
out of their homes after they had been foreclosed
upon. Why? To get them out ASAP and turn around and sell the propeerty – to make a killing in the real
estate market.

What’s especially sleazy about Economou is when the bank fore-closed
on the home, Economou took it
upon himself to make out fake legal looking
documents and taping them to the
people’s homes – giving them a few
weeks to move out or else.

This is totally illegal! People do not
have to move out immediately when
the bank forecloses! They can spend
months in their home as their case
makes its way through the legal system.

If Tony Economou had had his (illegal) way,
these folkswould be living at the PIP homeless shelter – and
he would be stuffing his pockets with cash – thousands of dollars!

When InCity Times called him on
this and published a story, Economou
bull shitted – told the public that it wasn’t him making
the GET OFF THIS PROP-ERTY
notices – it was Freddie
mac/Fanny Mae, to which these non-profits
said NO WAY, we neverd o
that, we never gave Tony Economou
such forms to paste on doors.

What a lying low-life, Economou is. No upstanding businessman from the community – no matter how hard he tries to pretend. This guy is simply greedy and will do anything for a buck – even if it is lying and breaking the law.

Do the people of Worcester’s District 1 really want a low-life
llike Tony Economou representing
them?

D oes Worcester want this guy to voice the concerns of the people?

NO!

Which brings us to the person we want you to vote for: VIRGINA RYAN

Yeas ago, when I was a student at
Burncoat Senior High School, Virginia
Ryan was a biology teacher there. She
was tough and no-nonsense – and I
was a little afraid of her. The 15-year-old me was glad when I learned I got the sweet and brillliant
Mr. LaBelle as my 10th grade biology
teacher, But my good pal Paula T. had Miss Ryan
– and liked her.

The years have gone by and we (meaning I – Rosalie)
have toughened up. We have
learned to look beyound a person’s
exterior to find, in Miss Ryan’s case at
least, a very good, hardworking,
straigh-shooting person. And we like Ryan’s platform.

This is what District 1 and the Worcester
City Council needs: someone
(Virigina Ryan) who is going to fight
for home owners (Ryan’s for the lowest residential taxr ate), our schools (she was a WPSchool teacher for years and years, our students (she was committed to all her kids learning!). Plus she was a biology teacher – so she will/and has done her homework on the Asian Long-horned beetle and Worcester’s trees.

District 1, if you folks
elect Virginia Ryan, will be getting a person
with a ton of energy! I know she is
retired and I know that retirees’ contributions
and their premiums via City of Worcester was what put Ryan in the limelight, but she has many more interests/goals.

Ryan cares about being fair – and she
is not afraid to speak her mind. She has a ton of energy – has
been going door to door meeting a ton
of District 1 voters!

This is a good
thing!

But why do I like Virginia Ryan? It’s the personal stuff – the small stuff. The kind feelings she has shown me through her letters and even actions these last three years. For instance, over
these past few years Ryan has sent me leeters to the
editor. They have not been about her or the retirees of the City of Worcester. They have been about kids and poor
folks. For instance, one letter she wrote
us detailed how for years and years she
took the Worcester Public Schools students
to all kinds of cities and countries
via the Burncoats/WPS field-trip system.
And I remembered Miss Ryan did do that – every
year taking a bus -oad of Burncoat students
to Washington DC to learn about our Capitol and our government. She did this every year!
Would I, as a sanity-loving adult,
want to do the same? Take a bunch of teenagers to DC? Heck no! Well, Miss Ryan beleived in kids,
in history, in our nation’s history and DID IT!
Put it all together with her yearly
field trips to Washington. She did this for
years. The letters she wrote to me
talked of keeping the field trip system
alive and well in our public schools. Ryan knew that going
to DC or Canada or maybe even France was a
cool thing for kids – was yet another way for
students to learn. Learn other stuff
than what she was teaching them in bio
class.

Finally, one of Virginia
Ryan’s last letters to the editor to me detailed this incident: Virginia was shopping at Wal Mart in
West Boylston – it was wintertime and
she was appalled, just appalled, that the
cashiers of Wal Mart had no real barriier
between their cashier stations and the cold/cold wind
– that is the cashiers were working
right in front of the automatic exit
door. She wrote the wind was cold and was
whipping in every time a customer paid the cashier and walked out of Wal Mart. And they didn’t even
have coats on! What a crumby way to
work for five or so hours! Where,
Virginia Ryan wanted to know, was
the barrier that protected these workers
from the elements? Why didn’t
Wal Mart errect some kind of partition?
Do the right thing? I think she even
complained to Wal Mart.

This impressed me the most! This made me
think: Virgina Ryan is sensitive and moral – she cares about
folks most people don’t think twice
about.

So, based on my adult dealings
with Virgina Ryan, I say she is a biologist,
a champion of kids and public school education. She is someone who will always do
the right thing!

She is not a politician like Smith and, God forbid, the creep-meister Tony Ecomou – kicking folks like the Wal Mart cashiers Ryan defended out of their homes!